I have come to realise that, whatever my
political future holds, I will never be a good strategist. I am too emotional,
too raw. For me, to cite the oft-used phrase coined by the Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci, my
'optimism of the will' too easily dominates any 'pessimism of the intellect.' I
can work on it, but that's probably something I have to accept.

Therefore, my response to the Conservative
Party’s recent election victory in the UK is not an analytical one. Instead
I wish to make an impassioned, though still considered, call to action to
everyone. I don't just mean those who consider themselves 'of the Left', but
every single human being in the UK and beyond who desires to live in a just
society. This call is to keep the faith
in humanity, to keep the faith with the poorest and most marginalised in society,
and to do this by redoubling our personal and collective commitment to win true
democracy.Let me explain.

I have read some worrying
articles and Facebook comments declaring the British electorate to be stupid—like
turkeys voting for Christmas. In the recent election it was more a case of the
turkeys not voting at all. A
third of UK citizens did not vote and, as this
political map seems to show, these non-voters are much more likely to come
from the most deprived sections of the country.

Although I understand the deep frustration
felt by so many people, this reaction worries me. Generalisations about the ‘stupidity’
of the ‘lower orders’ are dehumanising and have no place in genuinely
progressive politics. They are anti-democratic because they lead to a Leninist
hierarchical, authoritarian perspective in which the unthinking masses must be
led to their own liberation by an intellectual vanguard.

Instead, I want to use the work of Antonio
Gramsci and the inspirational Brazilian educator and philosopher Paulo Freire to emphasize
the intellectual potential of all people, and to argue for everyone to reach
out to the most oppressed citizens through a dialogue that starts with
listening—really listening.

Following Marx, the fundamental problem for
Gramsci was that in a class society the dominant ideology is that of the ruling
capitalist class. Today, this insight must be supplemented by other critical
perspectives, since the dominant ideology isn't just bourgeois, but white,
patriarchal, heteronormative, and able-bodied. In short, the production of
knowledge and 'truth' is power, and when people surrender their intellectuality
to self-proclaimed 'neutral' 'experts' in universities, think-tanks, and
government departments, they effectively surrender their power and liberty.

Freire thought that people without this
intellectual power became rendered as dehumanised ‘objects.’ Thus, a process of
humanization is necessary through a process he called 'conscientization'
(becoming politically conscious). This must take place through an ongoing
'praxis' that is founded on dialogue—a dynamic interaction between action and
reflection. To paraphase Freire, people become full human beings when they are
able to read their own world and write their own history.

The point is that the democratisation of knowledge is essential to the democratisation of
society. Alternatively put, everyone must become an ‘intellectual.’ Those who already have
intellectual power and seek to overcome hegemonic social structures must not
seek to tell those less educated than them what to do or what to think. Instead
they have to recognise the limits of their knowledge and reach out to those who
are oppressed through a dialogue that begins by listening. In his masterpiece Pedagogy of
the Oppressed,Freire was unequivocal:

“Pedagogy which begins with the egoistic
interests of the oppressors (an egoism cloaked in the false generosity of
paternalism) and makes of the oppressed the objects of its humanitarianism, itself
maintains and embodies oppression. It is an instrument of dehumanization...The
correct method for a revolutionary leadership to employ in the task of
liberation is, therefore, not ‘libertarian propaganda.’ Nor can the leadership
merely ‘implant’ in the oppressed a belief in freedom, thus thinking to win
their trust. The correct method lies in
dialogue. The conviction of the oppressed that they must fight for their
liberation is not a gift bestowed by the revolutionary leadership, but the
result of their own conscientization.”

What is the nature of this dialogue? For Freire it has four components. It has to
start with love: “Dialogue cannot exist...in the absence of a profound
love for the world and for people. The naming of the world, which is an act of
creation and re-creation, is not possible if it is not infused with love.”

Second, it has to
be founded on faith: “Dialogue further requires an intense faith in
humankind, faith in their power to make and remake, to create and re-create,
faith in their vocation to be more fully human (which is not the privilege of
an elite, but the birthright of all). Faith in people is an a priori
requirement for dialogue; the ‘dialogical man’ believes in others even before he
meets them face to face.”

This was how Freire saw democratisation: as a fundamentally
educational process of collective dialogue founded on love, faith, hope, and
critical thinking. Truly democratic social change can take place only
when the 'empirical' or ‘social’
knowledge of ordinary people combines with the 'critical' or 'scientific'
knowledge of educators to produce 'transformative knowledge' that can change
the world. In short, the revolution has to be pedagogical. I think Freire was
absolutely right. Indeed, he has been a central inspiration in my own life,
worldview, and endeavours.

Coming back to the here and now, I believe
that Freire and other critical educators can show us the path to winning
democracy and justice for all. Long before the recent UK election, I knew that current
systems were genocidal and ecocidal. What
the election result makes clear is that—given the current depth of the economic
crisis and ecological collapse facing society—the reformist path is a dead end.
We need radical, revolutionary social transformation.

If you’re reading this gripped by despair, or
frightened by the prospect of so much more human suffering, then please think
about the ideas I’ve presented. I really believe, now more than ever, that there is no innocent bystander; that we all have
a clear moral obligation to act. Spending a bit more on your bananas or
coffee won't do it; giving money to charities won't do it; even volunteering in
shelters or food banks won't do it.

All these are admirable actions, but they are
reformist rather than revolutionary. Instead, we need to come together to build
the future. The proliferation of grassroots organisations and networks that are
developing new,
experimental non-commodified ways of producing, consuming, distributing,
and exchanging the things we need to thrive help me to believe that the
(r)evolution has already begun. However, for these developments to succeed,
they must be founded on, and regularly reinvigorated by, real dialogue.

Luckily, the Freireian approach is already
well established, and has a long, proud,
global history. In the UK, for example, the Edinburgh-based Adult
Learning Project has been going since 1979. We can learn so much from such
projects. Creating time and space for dialogue is difficult but possible —I ran
a public event on the night before the election in my local community centre
called ‘What would a real democracy
be like? And how can we start to build it?’ Over forty people from a wide range
of backgrounds participated in really lively and constructive conversation, and
called for a second meeting.

A Freireian approach doesn’t just mean taking
a critical perspective on the external world; it also means embarking on an internal analysis of ourselves as
individuals and in collectives. I know that’s tough—at the moment, after a
serious disagreement, I am barely speaking to my own parents let alone the rest
of humankind. But I’m working on it. I know I need to take my own advice. The
revolution doesn’t begin ‘out there.’ It begins inside each one of us, and
proceeds through dialogue. We need to talk...and we need to listen.

So, please, have faith in each other. It will
be richly rewarded. True democracy cannot be built on anything else.

Joel Lazarus is an Independent Social Research Foundation research
fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies, Warwick
University. He is working on a project to produce a TV drama series as a
catalyst for a process of mass public praxis. Joel co-founded a community
education project in Oxford called People's
Political Economy.

This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 licence.
If you have any queries about republishing please contact us.
Please check individual images for licensing details.